I have an internet connection that's pretty good. 20mb/s down and 2mb/s up. More than enough for whatever I need. I've tested my ping across all points of the US and it comes out to be around 20-30ms depending on the server.

So naturally you're all thinking there's no way I could lag, right?

Wrong. See ping is one of the biggest contributing factors to online gaming. Your up and down "speeds" not so much. The funny thing about ping is that it's never the same. You could spend hours testing it and never get the same value. Today I'm especially having laggy game, more than I ever did before. Frustrated I did a ping test and my jitter (percentage that measures your pings consistency) and it's 37% which is pretty bad. My ping also came back at 100ms which isn't ideal for online gaming. There's really no reason for this huge increase, it just happens.

I went back and checked it again about an hour later and my ping had clamed down. My jitter dropped into the teens and my online experience has been better. The point of this thread is simple. Just because you have a top-of-the-line internet package and you test well one day of the week doesn't mean you're not the reason for your own lag. You quality of service could be awful at any moment. Things happen.

Yes, connections do have variances do to many factors. To best judge your connection, don't just look at your test results.. look at the consistency of these results over time. OP- if this amount of variance happens often, then your connection is moderate/poor and may want to look into possible causes.

I like to believe I have a decent service and connection, yet I still have latency and suffer its consequences when gaming. I just know its part of the experience, one thing that has helped my connection is having my system wired directly into my modem. I stop using WiFi with BO2 and its been an improvement.

Adding a wireless router to mix is adding a step to your networking. Removing a step makes everything quicker. Not to mention the transmitting of a signal through WiFi is a long (relatively speaking that is) process

Adding a wireless router to mix is adding a step to your networking. Removing a step makes everything quicker. Not to mention the transmitting of a signal through WiFi is a long (relatively speaking that is) process

Yup, ever since I started playing COD I was running wifi and never cared. After MW3 I realized what needed to be done. I would encourage all who play the game allot to go wired (ASAP).

I stopped running wired during MW3 because of the increase chance of host. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I was host all the time like most do, but it definitely increases your chance because you're connection is more stable and overall better. A lot of people were nerfing their internet do avoid being host "all the time" and this meant that if you were host you had to work that much harder and the host suffered a lot meaning everyone connected to the host suffers too. What people don't realize is how selfish and foolish it is to mess with your internet. It makes so many problems worse.

I power cycle my modem and router before I sit down to play, then run the network test on my system. I really don't know if it helps, or just superstition. Either way, it makes me feel like I have a fresh connection, and SEEMs to run better than when I don't do this.

I live in Western PA, 50DS/10US (Comcast). I can generally ping 20-30 ms over 400-600 miles, around 80-90 to California, about 2500 miles. I guess it could be traveling through a lot more than 2500 miles of wire though.

Here is the thing though. There are some servers I try to ping to, that are relatively close that give me a much higher ping. 100 miles away pinging at 117 ms, etc. There is a lot more going on with connection than just your end.

It largely depends on what game im playing. i can play BF4, halo, etc while other people are using the internet and have no problem at all while COD has always had an issue. Personally, i think CoD is a bandwidth hog.

I get 28-35 down 10 up usually 15-16ms ping locally, probably in the 20-50 range for the west coast.

It largely depends on what game im playing. i can play BF4, halo, etc while other people are using the internet and have no problem at all while COD has always had an issue. Personally, i think CoD is a bandwidth hog.

I get 28-35 down 10 up usually 15-16ms ping locally, probably in the 20-50 range for the west coast.

One person, doesn't matter who, can cause lag for the entire lobby because of the hosting system CoD uses. BF has dedicated servers so only you contribute to your connection. Another factor is that Call of Duty is so fast paced that your brain can adjust to the speed and give you the feeling that lag is more than it really is. For instance the other day I was playing a game and my girlfriend was watching my. Afterwards she asked how could I possibly see anything moving as fast as I was. Our brains adjust to the fast pace flow of the game. One second in Call of Duty seems like two seconds to us. This means that if we're lagging even a little it seems like more.

Think of it like driving on the highway at 70 mph and then hitting a small town where the speed is 35 mph. You slow down initially but as soon as you take your eyes of the odometer you speed up because you're use to going faster and 50 feels like 35.

Unless they haven't hooked them up yet, i should be getting dedi's since i got an xbox one. I hate that they took out the connection status from the scoreboard. I can't yell at people to leave because their connection sucks anymore.

I had no trouble with titan fall either during the alpha. I even tried connecting to the US east (im in CO) and had no problem even with a higher ping. It might just be that CoD has a terrible net code, but then again so does Bf4. Theoretically if they are both using dedi's they should behave the same way, but they don't

Unless they haven't hooked them up yet, i should be getting dedi's since i got an xbox one. I hate that they took out the connection status from the scoreboard. I can't yell at people to leave because their connection sucks anymore.

Dedicated servers and cloud servers are two completely different things. In principle they're similar but as far as reliability goes cloud servers have proven to be much more hassle and problematic than they were thought to have been. Titian Fall uses cloud servers and while in the BETA test there were very few people online making for great game play, but during some of their tests Respawn said that they were experiencing more problems than they were prepared for.

Im not all that worried about the supposed reliability of cloud servers. Apple runs millions if not billions of iMessages through their servers everyday(and tons of other services), Microsoft has tons of services backed up by cloud servers, and google has a ton of products that rely on cloud servers. They might be a little more problematic right now simply because people still haven't entirely figured out how to use them properly.

Titanfall alpha did have an issue at about 6 or 7 MST the day it was released because everybody was trying to get on, which was resolved in about 30 minutes. They are still using data centers just like with dedicated servers. In all honesty, they are probably using more of what is closer to traditional dedicated servers than cloud servers. They just say cloud servers cause it sounds fancy and more people think they know what those are

Im not all that worried about the supposed reliability of cloud servers. Apple runs millions if not billions of iMessages through their servers everyday(and tons of other services), Microsoft has tons of services backed up by cloud servers, and google has a ton of products that rely on cloud servers.

An iMessage doesn't compare to the demand a video game has and I've watched the wheels on my 5s turn as it tries to push out an iMessage through WiFi. Video games trump all in terms of demand on the internet. Unless you're running a successful website or file sharing I can't really see what other service a typical person would use that requires more. It would be like sending 30 or so iMessages and receiving a response per second. I don't see cloud servers being able to do that per player hundreds, if not thousands of times over. If they were so cheap to implement I would bet that dedicated servers would be used for Titian Fall.